In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/28/2006
at 03:50 PM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>It appeared to me that the OP, perhaps using ISPF as the editor-
>of-choice, was composing data to be exported as input to a desktop
>program.
Indeed. And it might be appropriate in his specific case to drop the
sequence numbers. But if the data are ultimately going to someone
else, it's his responsibility to be sure that they don't require the
sequence numbers.
>Perhaps you feel that all utilities, on all platforms, should
>process only columns 1-72 of their input data.
And perhaps not.
>Ain't gonna happen.
That's fortunate, since I routinely write source lines longer than 72.
Bruce: yes, I am assuming that 73-80 are in ISPF format, with 73-78
the real sequence number and 79-80 the change level.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
